Goodman Released, But Press Freedom Issue Lingers

The arrests of Democracy Now! host Amy Goodman and members of her crew, as well as an Associated Press photographer, highlighted the broad sweep that police agencies are using in rounding up not just demonstrators (almost 300 arrested so far) but those who would report on demonstrations outside the Republican National Convention.

Goodman and her colleagues, as well as AP photographer Matt Rourke, were released by Tuesday morning.

But the issues raised by these arrests, and related incidents in which mainstream and independent journalists have been sprayed with tear gas, pushed around and threatened by authorities, remain.

David Ake, an AP assistant chief of bureau in Washington, said, "Covering news is a constitutionally protected activity, and covering a riot is part of that coverage."

Here's what the folks at Democracy Now! are saying:

ST. PAUL--Democracy Now! host Amy Goodman and producers Sharif Abdel Kouddous and Nicole Salazar have all been released from police custody in St. Paul following their illegal arrest by Minneapolis Police on Monday afternoon.

All three were violently manhandled by law enforcement officers. Abdel Kouddous was slammed against a wall and the ground, leaving his arms scraped and bloodied. He sustained other injuries to his chest and back. Salazar's violent arrest by baton-wielding officers, during which she was slammed to the ground while yelling, "I'm Press! Press!," resulted in her nose bleeding, as well as causing facial pain. Goodman's arm was violently yanked by police as she was arrested.

On Tuesday, Democracy Now! will broadcast video of these arrests, as well as the broader police action. These will also be available on: www.democracynow.org

Goodman was arrested while questioning police about the unlawful detention of Kouddous and Salazar who were arrested while they carried out their journalistic duties in covering street demonstrations at the Republican National Convention. Goodman's crime appears to have been defending her colleagues and the freedom of the press.

Ramsey County Sheriff Bob Fletcher told Democracy Now! that Kouddous and Salazar were arrested on suspicion of rioting, a felony. While the three have been released, they all still face charges stemming from their unlawful arrest. Kouddous and Salazar face pending charges of suspicion of felony riot, while Goodman has been officially charged with obstruction of a legal process and interference with a "peace officer."

Democracy Now! forcefully rejects all of these charges as false and an attempt at intimidation of these journalists. We demand that the charges be immediately and completely dropped.

Democracy Now! stands by Goodman, Kouddous and Salazar and condemns this action by Twin Cities' law enforcement as a clear violation of the freedom of the press and the First Amendment rights of these journalists.

During the demonstration in which the Democracy Now! team was arrested, law enforcement officers used pepper spray, rubber bullets, concussion grenades and excessive force against protesters and journalists. Several dozen demonstrators were also arrested during this action, including a photographer for the Associated Press.

Amy Goodman is one of the most well-known and well-respected journalists in the United States. She has received journalism's top honors for her reporting and has a distinguished reputation of bravery and courage. The arrest of Goodman, Kouddous and Salazar and the subsequent criminal charges and threat of charges are a transparent attempt to intimidate journalists.

Democracy Now! is a nationally-syndicated public TV and radio program that airs on over 700 radio and TV stations across the US and the globe.

Video of Amy Goodman's Arrest: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYjyvkR0bGQ

Comments (21)

1. Look, given THIS GOP, Ms Goodman lucky she's not in Uzbekistan undergoing "intensive interrogation" now.

   Plus the KARMIC pay-back with all the new fun with "Miss Congeniality" seems to be in full swing.

   I bet if Ms Goodman was asked, she'd trade one night in jail for...

   the Lyle Johnston interview going public or Walt Monegan's e-mails being saved.

   This has GOT to be the worst GOP Convention in history (even including 1976 or possibly the 1932 one).

   Posted by Maskdelta at 09/02/2008 @ 1:19pm

2. No no. But you don't understand. These are leftist journalists. They should all be tossed in jail anyway. I'm sure they were GOING to commit some crime.

   Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/02/2008 @ 1:56pm

3. DEMOCRACY ¿HOW?

   Posted by frosty zoom at 09/02/2008 @ 3:09pm

4. When did we sink so low that all we could afford to hire are thugs as law officers? Can't we borrow more money from china? How about more visas for Indian or Russian law officers? I bet we could get a bunch of Iraqis.

   Posted by lachatte at 09/02/2008 @ 3:27pm

5. I believe the police were patient, more patient than I would have been with some of these things on the street...I would make them pay for all the destruction and send them the bill for the police costs..to be paid BEFORE release...someone is funding these miscreants.. Posted by JOMAMMA at 09/02/2008 @ 4:58pm

   Patient!? They were assaulting and arresting people before the protests started. Also I don't think assaulting three journalists is exactly the practice you want. Yay freedom of speech! Yay freedom of the press!

   Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/02/2008 @ 5:14pm

6. JOMAMMA:

   How much does PNAC pay you to be a professional forum troll?

   Posted by jorcheim at 09/02/2008 @ 5:34pm

7. I'm curious... how much time have you actually listened to her? And which books specifically have you read? And what about what she wrote did you find disagreeable?

   And don't say "ALL OF IT!!! ZOMGS!!!". Cite specific examples, or you're lying.

   Posted by jorcheim at 09/02/2008 @ 6:00pm

8. You know, hearing that Amy Goodman and her two producers got arrested at the RNC didn't surprise me much. But as a reporter who's still pissed off at the DNC for hiding the so-called "Free Speech Zones" at their clambake last week, it did piss me the hell off! Like her or not, like her show or not, like her stances or not, Amy Goodman is a reporter and she was doing her at-least-at-this-moment constitutionally protected job. How fuckin' dare you arrest her for it?! Last I looked, the First Amendment still applied, despite the valiant efforts of Bush and Company to render it and all other parts of the Constitution useless in the name of fighting terrorism, but arresting reporters is something that you usually see in countries where saying the wrong thing to those in power can get you killed. But then again, I seem to recall that when the War in Iraq started, anyone who dared ask why we're there and did it make sense was branded "un-American". On second thought, maybe I shouldn't be so surprised that we're arresting reporters now. It's a logical progression.

   Posted by edwriter at 09/02/2008 @ 6:01pm

9. IOW, a professional protester paid to...protest a point of view....a journalist is supposed to be a reporter of just the facts without a prejudice...a task that is impossible for 90% of the activists' who believe they are journalists. Posted by JOMAMMA at 09/02/2008 @ 5:21pm

   Haha. Tell me one journalist who reports without prejudice. It is not possible. Why? No matter how subtle we all inject our opinion into what we write.

   Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/02/2008 @ 6:40pm

10. I listen to Democracy Now! -- all the time and have been since it was (I think) part of the Pacifica Radio News reports in the mid-1980s.

    And, yes, there is no doubt that Amy Goodman is an activist journalist -- good or bad as that is. You make the call. But please spare me the absolutism of the opinion that she was doing her constitutionally protected job. I watched the video; she wasn't doing a reporter's job. She was arguing with police to find out information about her colleagues. Right? Is that reporting? No. And I'm not calling it wrong. But she was clearly arguing with the police. There seemed to be some kind of line over which protesters were not allowed to cross. When she did, the police told her to step back ... she didn't .. they arrested her -- NOT for reporting anything.

    I'll wait to hear the details. She might be correct. On the other hand, one certainly couldn't find a complete story on HER/Democracy Now web site. In fact, (fact, like "reporters" report), go to Editor and Publisher -- which supports journalists and has demanded Goodman's release --- and compare its coverage to Democracy Now's. Go to ANY credible journalistic coverage of the event and you will see -- despite calls for Goodman's release and even ouotrage -- drastically less subjective coverage. Classic Amy Goodman coverage; that is, coverage that only covers her agenda.

    Journalism? We are better than that.

    Posted by pedalaforte at 09/02/2008 @ 6:48pm

11. Posted by JOMAMMA at 09/02/2008 @ 6:23pm

    So you didn't read Amy Goodman's books. You read your wife's mind. Whatta sacko.

    Posted by Sorelish at 09/02/2008 @ 6:54pm

12. for a better understanding of my point of view see Chris Hays post on the constitution and his dilema on how to get around it. Posted by JOMAMMA at 09/02/2008 @ 6:23pm'

    If that is what you got out of that article then you need to take some critical reading classes because you missed the entire point of his article. It was not AT ALL about how to get around the Constitution. His entire article about the fact that like the Bible the Constitution is used to justify all kinds of wacky beliefs at entirely opposite ends of the spectrum. His point was that how can beliefs this vastly different be both defended by the same document. He was saying that we shoulodn't use the Constitution to try to defend a belief as right or wrong, we should use the merits of the belief itself to defend it as right or wrong and then we should use the rightness of that belief to amend the Constitution to then MAKE it Constitutional or Unconstitutional. but then once again your rabid dislike of anyone that speaks for the left you completely missed the point of what the man was saying and instead put your own spin on it to make him sound like the "enemy". It's why I think partisan politics is for idiots.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/02/2008 @ 9:39pm

13. mostly it is fodder as are most blog sites involving the fringe. Posted by JOMAMMA at 09/02/2008 @ 7:17pm

    Libertarians are considered fringe, not mainstream.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/02/2008 @ 9:42pm

14. How much does PNAC pay you to be a professional forum troll?

    Posted by jorcheim at 09/02/2008 @ 5:34pm

    more like WWE

    Posted by frosty zoom at 09/02/2008 @ 9:55pm

15. I lusten to Amy when I am home

    by JM.

    aren't you married?

    Posted by frosty zoom at 09/02/2008 @ 10:03pm

16. Totally off topic, but can somebody tell me more about this ignore list thing? I've looked everywhere I can think of for info about how to use it (like an "ignore this user" link?????) but haven't found a thing.

    I like discussion with people I disagree with as much as anybody but I could sure do without the comments of some of the loonies here whose talking points seem to be limited to quotes from Rush and O'Reillly.

    Any help appreciated.

    Posted by stubearto at 09/03/2008 @ 01:17am

17. click to ignore yourself.

    then you'll go to a page that says you've been added to your ignore list.

    there, you'll have the option of unignoring yourself or anybody else you have chosen to ignore.

    i still don't get the "warn" deal.....

    well,

    i just warned myself and nada....

    Posted by frosty zoom at 09/03/2008 @ 01:28am

18. Um, click what, Frosty? I've tried the warn one and I'm guessing that does nothing. The only place "ignore" appears in the forum is directly above the box I'm typing in.: "View your ignore list." When I click on that, it tells me there's nobody on my ignore list. But no info on how to add somebody (not even myself) to it.

    Posted by stubearto at 09/03/2008 @ 01:45am

19. Be advised, what is happening at the RNC is exactly what they want to happen and it is even better if most of citizens of this country are oblivious to it. These cases could get elevated to the handpicked lapdog Supreme Court where our civil liberties basically will get slaughtered once and for all. Most likely, the "Supreme" Court with its activist judges will decide against the journalists and protesters, consider them "domestic terrorists" and strike down the 1st and 4 amendments. You will lose your civil liberties courtesy of your own Supreme Court and you will lose them swiftly and quietly. The Rove Mafia is in charge now folks with or without him.

    Posted by Dogtail at 09/03/2008 @ 02:08am

20. Posted by stubearto at 09/03/2008 @ 01:45am | ignore this person | warn this person

    click "ignore this person" under their post.

    it should (i repeat, "should")

    take you to a page that shows your ignore list.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 09/03/2008 @ 02:10am

21. an ignore list which will include the latest ignoree.

    at that page you can unignore someone if you so wish.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 09/03/2008 @ 02:11am